Friday, 17 March 2017

Ian Gorst's Guide to the Galaxy.



Chief Minister Ian Gorst.


The meaning of everything, according to The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, was/is 42 but Chief Minister Ian Gorst has his own version.

After the scandal of the Jersey Innovation Fund (JIF) was exposed serious questions needed to be asked, or more importantly answered, of those politically responsible i.e Senator Philip Ozouf who signed off two of the loans, and Senator Lyndon Farnham, along with Senator Alan Maclean who between them signed off five of the loans and last but not least Chief Minister Ian Gorst who surely has ultimate responsibility for the actions/in-actions of his Ministers and Assistant Ministers?

We reported HERE. how it looked like Senator Ozouf was being slung under the bus for his part in this fiasco, and in fairness to him, he resigned as Assistant Minister So we know he did "The Honourable Thing." What we DON'T know is if Senator's Maclean and Farnham have also offered to do "The Honourable Thing" or if Chief Minster Gorst asked them to?


Deputy Montfort Tadier.

Reform Jersey's Deputy Montfort Tadier attempted to find this out on 14 February 2017 by tabling the following Oral Question to the Chief Minister:

“Given that Senator Ozouf was not the only Minister to have signed off loans from the Jersey Innovation Fund, will the Chief Minister also be asking Senators Farnham and Maclean to 'step aside' from their Ministerial duties until the relevant investigation has fully reported back?”

This is where we discovered that senator's Farnham and Maclean signed off the majority of the loans but we DIDN'T get an answer to Deputy Tadier's question. So on 14 March 2017 the Deputy attempted once more to get his question addressed if not answered where he tabled the following Oral Question to the Chief Minister.

“Will the Chief Minister state whether, following the publication of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s report entitled ‘Jersey Innovation Fund’ (R.3/2017), Senator Farnham and/or Senator Maclean offered to resign as Ministers or whether he, as Chief Minister, asked them to resign?”

Again a pretty straight forward, clear and concise, question? But this is where we discovered that Chief Minister Gorst has his own version of "42" which appears to be "the former Assistant Minister did the honourable thing."

If this (edited video below) didn't make such a mockery of our so called "Democratic Process" it could almost be funny. The fact that the (unelected/unaccountable) Chair(s) of the States Assembly rule it perfectly acceptable for the Chef Minister (and by implication ANY Minister) to "come out with their own version of 42" in "answer" to any question makes the whole so-called "Democratic Process" that much more (almost) laughable and tragic............ 




75 comments:

  1. That 4:25sec is just plain crazy.He might as well just said that his wife makes a nice cheese cake.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Gorst will not acknowledge either question asked. If Farnham and Maclean had offered to resign, Ian Gorst clearly did not accept the resignation Why? If he himself asked them the named Farnham and Maclean to resign then that would admit his own failing he is boxed in to the situation and we as the public are not entitled to the information.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Deputy Tadier, you are a mischief-maker. CM Gorst and gang donot like mischief-makers! Keep up the good work Deputy.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The states is a farce these days. At least Higgins and the Reform Deputies try to get straight answers. Trouble is there is now no one in the Chamber like Trevor Pitman who would have treated these insulting non-answers with the contempt they deserved, going straight for the jugular. Our backbenchers have to stop allowing our Bailiff to silence them so easily. It is question time but rarely any answers time.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Good blog from Rico Sorda on the other channel. Team Voice what would we do without them?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The only reliable news sources for political matters now that we don't have the blogs of Stuart, Bob Hill and Trevor's Bald Truth blog and videos. You two knock the State Media into a cocked hat. Long may you both continue.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Don't know how old you are at Voice but if you want to see what most of Jersey's ministers are like without the civil servant written scripts seek out and post a short clip of the Gumbies from the old Monty Python TV show.

    ReplyDelete

  8. The Bailiff in frustration, once reminded Deputy Anne Pryke to answer the question, why did he not ask Gorst to do the same. If nothing else this would have been a formal and recorded slap on the wrist for Gorst.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The man without a spinal column obviously has a problem with letting his one grey cell compute a straight forward question. what is of interest is that in all the attempts by Deputy Tadier and Mezec to get an answer it is noteworthy that Philip Baillache and Paul Routier seemed to find something very interseting in thier feet? Bring on the next election PLEASE!

    ReplyDelete
  10. This is without doubt about as clear an example of the total bias of the (unelected) Bailff in not telling CM Gorst to answer a legitimate question. This is why nothing will change until these unelected spokespersons are removed from our government. It is sad to see the new Queens Governer already 'toeing the line' instead of standing up for the ordinary islander. Come on your Majesty smell the coffee!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I got the impression that Her Majesty was happy with the situation hence her most recent representative telling us that the States are jolly good people and to be 'obeyed'. After all, that's the idea of democracy..

      The Beano is not the Rag

      Delete
  11. Kaz D Bumblebee19 March 2017 at 11:15

    Gorst is appalling but then so are the ministers generally. Personally I would really like to see Montfort Tadier become Chief Minister with Sam Mezec as his Deputy. I would also like to see those who have served the island so well over the years get some proper recognition from the UK instead of all thses establishment stooges, such as former Chief Ministers and jurats. A good example would be Deputy Mike Higgins. I would really like to see him get a well earnt OBE for his political work and his wonderful development of the Battle of Britain Air Display. Possibly a Knighthood would be even more appropriate?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This an early April Fool?
      Made me giggle :-)

      Delete
    2. Jurats getting OBEs? I agree that must be an early April Fool! Court cases should be heard by a cross section of the mebers of the public. Not establishment party lackeys who are always old, white and wealthy.

      Agree on Dep Higgisn and his stirling work with the air display. Probably brings in more visitors and cash to our island than all of the idiots like Farnham, Ozouf and Locate Jersey spongers with their £13.000 air jollies.

      Delete
  12. Like it or not, Chief Minister Gorst is doing a good job for the Establishment. He is following well in the footsteps of Walker and Le Suere. Realistically who could replace him or take him out at the next years elections? Any ideas or predictions anyone.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The point is he is not doing a good job for the majority of Jersey.

      Delete
  13. That any individual involved in Jersey's bent Royal Court and so called justice system can be awarded an OBE by the Crown or UK government demonstrates just how far up the line the corruption goes. Paedo protectors and anti democrats like Bailhache and Birt already have their kinghthoods. How much more blatant could it get?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Jimmy Savile got knighted and he was Jerseys Mr Battle three times.... How more blatant could that get!?

    ReplyDelete
  15. See in the Rag some 62 year old in court for riding his motorbike through red lights when a mother was nearby with her young children. All well and good but how strange that when a man knocks down a well known anti-Jersey Way politician on a zebra crossing with the lights red and against him Bowron's police don't even charge him and our bent court don't prosecute.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes.

      That's absolutely right. Well observed.

      What passes for a "Police Force" in Jersey is - repeatedly - pro-actively engaged in shielding criminals - that is, the "well-protected" - Jersey oligarchy approved - criminals.

      I've been trying to make formal statements of criminal complaint to the Jersey "police" - of child-abuse - of corruption - of perjury.

      They won't even take a statement.

      States of Jersey Police Force - since being illegally hi-jacked via illegal suspension of Graham Power = a criminal enterprise.

      Stuart Syvret

      Delete
    2. I waatched the interview about the case referred to above on vfc. Former Deputy Shona Pitman was the victim of the Bowron Keystone Cops and their selective charging mantra. That the police should claim that what had happened was "just an accident so nobody;s fault" was incredible.

      Yet shocking as what happened to Shona Pitman was the most mind-boggling part still was when Deputy Higgisn brought this up in the States and the Home Affairs minister Deputy Moore just made excuses on the lines of "Well, this is a person we all know". As if who the victim was made the police behaviour irrelevant.

      I seem to recall the police then "mislaid" the witness statements and would not even give the victim her own! I hope Stuart, Trevor, Shona herself and even bloogers like you and Rico are careful when you are out walking. As for refusing to take Stuart's statements WTF?

      Delete
  16. The baloney is ozzing out of Ozouf again with this Soft-Bank garbage. Him and his JEP chums are trying to spin this fund being 'managed' by one of our tax-dodge specialists as being huge for the island. Truth of the matter is that a few people will make loads of dosh but the benefit to the island generally will be zero. I just hope for their sake Soft-Bank don't ley Ozouf himself, or Farnham and MacLean manage any of it. Fund will be bolloxed within a year.

    ReplyDelete
  17. At least Philip Ozouf is in a different tree to his neighbour Deputy Peter McLinton .
    His latest political tweet on #therealpetermac is this ;
    Our cats enjoy eating bananas? fb.me/10MB4mA3m

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't know about a different political tree? After seeing Smashy (or is it Nicey?) McLinton's I was born for this meltdown in the States I'm more inclined to believe he probably fell out of a tree and bumped his bonce.

      Won't get re-elected. He has done bog all in our district and unlike the equally useless Chubby Macon he doesn't have the benefit of the old ladies liking him. Come back Beardy Duhamel and his sharing the bath water ideas.

      Delete
  18. Any more news on when the COI report will finally be published? Haven't seen any updates anywhere and certainly not on the COI's website. Talk about treating the victims and the public like mushrooms.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No news is good news? Or so the old saying goes. We can only hope.

      Delete
    2. With barely a week left of Marxh it is a really poor show that no indication has been given. Very worrying too in my personal opinion.

      Delete
  19. Interesting case, for followers of the States of Jersey, its civil service, and our broken system of justice.

    https://www.jerseylaw.je/judgments/unreported/Pages/[2017]JRC043.aspx

    Clearly, Mike Higgins has been doing his homework on this one.

    http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/AssemblyQuestions/2017/(168)%20Dep%20Higgins%20to%20SG%20re%20criminal%20charges%20brought%20in%20the%20Magistrates%20Court%20without%20assistance%20of%20the%20Law%20Officers.pdf

    We live in interesting times. All power to you, Mr Neville...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would imagine a rather notorious individual who was afforded taxpayer's monies to take Mr Syvret to court should now be feeling somewhat worried about the issue of perjury?

      Delete
    2. But only if Bowron's police don't illegally refuse to take a complainants statement? But then that surely could not happen in a democracy with an honest court system?

      Delete
  20. I see you are promoting Deputy Tadier's Trews News video on your sister blog. Why did he not do any more of these? If people want to get a lot of people watching they need to do these things regularly. A good example of this was the Bald Truth videos former Deputy Trevor Pitman used to do. These were up on a weekly basis and like a lot of people I know who are interested in politics we used to look forward to them. Deputy Tadier needs to make it a regular thing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hoping to publish episode 2 of "The Jersey Trews" in the next few days. Readers might also be interested to know that a return of "The Bald Truth Review" has not been ruled out..................

      Delete
    2. Is this second bit of news your 'Leak of the Week'?!

      Delete
  21. This is good news. I hope Lord Reginald will be making a guest appearance? Perhaps Deputy Tadier could interview him to scotch the ridiculous rumours that they are one and the same?

    A return of the Bald Truth would be even better. But I don't see how or why it would happen now? Trevor Pitman is gone from Jersey politics sadly, and I can't really see him behaving like some former politicians who just can't let go.

    Having said that the Bald Truth was often absolutely first class in both content and style. A political overview of the Jersey Way from someone who was one of our political heavyweights could be interesting. Look forward to the Jersey Trews regardless. So little good political comment out there these days.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Isn't Trevor Pitman based off island at the moment?

      If so a return of "The Bald Truth / The Bald Truth Review" would be brilliant because the Jersey based bloggers operate under the constant threat of abuse by the misused Data Protection Law and now the even more dangerous "telecommunications law":

      https://voiceforchildren.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/p192016-wolf-in-sheeps-clothing.html

      http://tomgruchy.blogspot.com/2016/05/harmful-electronic-communications-and.html

      Delete
  22. Stuart Syvret should do some videos too. How about Posts from a Potemkin Village?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Is Philip Bailhache asleep in the photo accompanying this blog? Or is he just doing a Terry Le Main impression by pretending to be? Gorst's speeches are so rivetting aren't they!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Three years in to their four year terms have you heard anything from your local representative during States debates? There must be at least twenty states members who I haven't a clue who they are or what they do. They may as well be stuffed or showroom dummies. As just a couple of examples what does Deputy Truscott do? Has he ever said anything since election? What has Deputy Wickenden ever done or said? Who are eight of the Constables? Does Deputy Andrew Lewis ever say anything you can believe? These are the sort of questions that need answering in the lead up to the next election.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Sir Cecil Bottom-Thwaite (former Constable of the island's 13th parish22 March 2017 at 17:50

    Looking forward to this new Lord Reg Tadier video.

    ReplyDelete
  26. When is the new Lord Monty Trews video to be published?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hopefully should have it published by (if not before) Monday.

      Delete
  27. Looks like Stuart is in a 'put up ' mode.... This could get interesting with the timing!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Looks like he wants to put up but the cops want him to SHUT UP.

      Delete
    2. Re the JEP piece (as posted at your link):

      Seeing as how the SOJP appear to be corresponding with Stuart, might he ask them to clarify if Mick Gradwell ever did interview Person 737 under caution as a suspect, what was the outcome, and is this the "investigation" to which they are referring.

      The SOJP response, seeking an unprotected email in advance of the protection of a formal complaint seems to echo the Inquiry's refusal to underwrite preliminary legal advice for Stuart, forcing him onto the hazard, before he submitted to one of their protocols.

      It does appear to me that he has something to say which neither the SOJP nor the Inquiry, both in Frank Walker mode, want to hear.

      Could Stuart perhaps indicate whether Andy Sibcy has fairly and comprhensively reflected his submitted material in the full JEP piece? He has intimated on Twitter that this would not be the case.

      Delete
  28. It seems the SOJP would like him to outline the case before they will take a statement, although the comment about requiring more and more information in correspondence is a little worrying. It could be that they want to know the claims beforehand so that they can consult with their masters, or should that be legal advisers, and have a strategy to reject the call for investigation pre prepared.


    If Stuart went down to the front desk though preferably with an independent witness such as Voice in tow, at least at the front desk, then would they not have to provide a reason why they will not take a statement. The first time that could be there is no one available, but then that would raise the question as to whether Stuart is receiving special treatment, and if a concerned member of the public with information on a totally unrelated crime would also receive the cold shoulder. Either way that is not good policing.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Could Stuart declare an affidavit in front of a solicitor under oath and have that formerly sent to the police and receipt acknowledged? It would have the same effect surely? Maybe Sinel would oblige pro bono?

    Either way the police would have sworn statement that they cannot deny having received. Then when the shit hits the fan later the proof will exist that they were told and did nothing.

    Also I cant help thinking that if the current delay to COI report is in anyway related to additional information received by the police then if they failed to pass on similar serious issues declared under oath, they would be setting themselves up for a fall.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Has Stuart really tried to give a sworn statement to the SOJP before and if so does he have anyone who can veryfy that? If the police haven't acted and won't do so now this is something that really should be taken seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Its a bit fishy that the jep/rag, would at this late and vital stage and after all that Stuart Syvret has been through, (which they know about). Would all of a sudden, be siding with him!?

    ReplyDelete
  32. I agree with anonymouse at19.13 while the JEP grab any news ( no matter how trivial ) and I dislike conspiracy with a passion, the fact that this is being taken seriously by them, means that they must have been provided with some serious proof to stick their necks out.

    ReplyDelete
  33. If SS could say that there were witnesses to his efforts to have the police take a statement from him, such as a lawyer of even members of the States, this would add a lot of weight to his claims that the police are not acting as they should.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Let's get this right. ...no matter what is claimed it is a fact .... He was not arrested by a squad of 8 police officers. He was arrested by one officer accompanied by a supervisor. The additional officers were Search Team officers who did an expert job in obtaining the evidence required . Those present were then subject to a plethora of his lies, condemnation and associated unnecessary stress. All from an individual whom although not completely daft doesn't seem to be able to function without lying through his teeth. ...believe it ..I was there!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately your comment will (should) not hold much weight. Notwithstanding the available evidence online against your assertion of events (you forgot to mention the search was conducted without a warrant) but the fact that you posted anonymously.

      You have attacked Stuart Syvret by calling him a liar but don't have the courage of your convictions to allow him the same opportunity. My belief is that you were there (the raid) but by posting anonymously you and your argument might be seen by some readers as a cowardly tolling comment not backed up with any evidence.

      Delete
    2. Without knowing who has made this comment Stuart has been accused of lying in the past by States Members and members of the Public online. The fact that Stuart Syvret never gave evidence for cross examination raises questions about his version of events in many areas and its his fault that there are many more doubters out there than before.

      Delete
    3. Calling somebody online a liar is not trolling.
      Robust debate.

      Delete
    4. Anonymously calling a named person a liar online has the whiff of cowardice and trolling about it. Having the courage of your convictions (as Stuart Syvret has) by posting under your own name doesn’t have so much of that whiff and could easier be termed as robust debate.

      Delete
    5. "Stuart has been accused of lying in the past by States Members"
      .....indeed. And invariably it turns out that Stuart was right and those "upright members" were errrr... *mistaken*

      Delete
  35. Parry G
    March 24, 2017 6:36 pm
    JEP, Let's get this right. ...no matter what is claimed it is a fact .... He was not arrested by a squad of 8 police officers. He was arrested by one officer accompanied by a supervisor. The additional officers were Search Team officers who did an expert job in obtaining the evidence required . Those present were then subject to a plethora of his lies, condemnation and associated unnecessary stress. All from an individual whom although not completly daft doesn't seem to be able to function without lying through his teeth. ...believe it ..I was there!

    That said...if he has the evidence he claims ...let him have audience.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And your role was what? on this fishing trip without a search warrant?

      How many officers?
      strange now that there is apparently no one available to take the Ex Health Minister's statement alleging serious crimes.

      couldn't make it up.

      Delete
  36. Why not take the report from the JEP down when he makes the complaint? Then the reporter can inform the public of the true situation

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Error above. Should read, why not take the reporter from the JEP

      Delete
  37. It quite possibly is one of the cops who was present in the massed raid who is commenting above - given how politicized - corrupt - and dishonest - and protective of child-abusers, rapists & murderers certain sections of the Jersey Police have been.

    The facts of the raid are as follows. And - after some initial lies by then Attorney General - the criminally conflicted Barking Bill Bailhache, who tried to down-play the scale of the massed raid - these facts became - quite quickly - the accepted version of events - not even disputed by the police and the AG in court: -

    On that morning I left the front door of the house to obtain an item from my car.

    Immediately three unmarked police cars sped up the drive - each containing two officers. I was surrounded by these 6 officers, and was then grabbed by the wrist by one who said, “your under arrest for allegedly breaking the data protection law.”

    In addition to those 6 officers - there were a further 2 specialist search officers out side in a van - along with another 2 officers equipped with a battering ram type of implement which they were going to use to smash the door down if I had not come out.

    Thus - there were ten officers involved on the ground at the house in this massed raid - along with at least that number controlling events back at HQ.

    I was taken into the house to get a clean t-shirt, and I asked if I could have the search warrant. The arresting officer paused - was going to say something - then changed his mind and said - “you’ll be shown the search-warrent back at the station”.

    This was an utter lie.

    No search -warrant was issued.

    And that made the raid in illegal act - as searches under the data protection law cannot be conducted - WITHOUT A SEARCH-WARRANT.

    I repeat - the raid was an illegal act.

    The cops then spent about 6 or 7 hours turning the entire property over - from top to bottom - supposedly search of one single document - which they all-ready knew I had - because I had previously e-mailed it TO THEM - ON THREE SEPARATE OCCASIONS - asking for them to re-open the case in question.

    Had a police officer simply knocked on the door - I WOULD HAVE GIVEN HIM OR HER A COPY.

    But - of course - such a course of action would not have served the purpose of terrorising me and other opposition politicians - and would have enabled the illegal trawl.

    Facts.

    Stuart Syvret

    ReplyDelete
  38. Does any know if Mr R Brocken still owns the Kensington Place hotel that will be bought by the States for building the new hospital? What's the betting the price will be a good one, I look forward to the row when the time comes.
    Yes - this one http://freespeechoffshore.nl/stuartsyvretblog/of-chancers-and-spivs/
    I wouldn't have even thought about it, had it not been for one Laura Brocken (daughter?) laying into Stuart Syvret on the JEP's Facebook story about Stuart recently :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr Brocken passed away in 2015. I would guess his family still own the hotel.

      Delete
  39. Just to correct a typo in the above, of course the last paragraph should have said "wouldn't" - as thus: -

    "But - of course - such a course of action would not have served the purpose of terrorising me and other opposition politicians - and WOULDN'T have enabled the illegal trawl."

    It was just that - an illegal trawl - essentially engineered to assault democracy - and protect dangerous criminals - and prevent opposition politicians from doing an important part of their public-interest duty - namely opposing police and Crown officer and judicial corruption.

    Stuart Syvret

    ReplyDelete
  40. There must be hundreds of us, all-told, in Jersey who know the truth of how the States of Jersey Police covered-up child-abuse for so many decades. The organisation was usually just as corrupt as the honoraries who they ultimately obeyed. My attack walks free in Jersey to this day. I even see him sometimes in the street. I know some of his other victims also see him. The Police know who he is. They know he walks free. They know he's guilty. And they, the cops, carry terrorising those who try to get justice and children protected.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was only a matter of time before Jersey became the subject of international scholarly study into political, moral and legal corruption:

      https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=mesjCQAAQBAJ&pg=PT333&lpg=PT333&dq=stuart+syvret&source=bl&ots=5ZMtJq-JVp&sig=E9yNbhlTxn7f7rTMK6z-_VLkjgI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjN24fU1vLSAhUpJcAKHchXBsI4HhDoAQhAMAY#v=onepage&q=stuart%20syvret&f=false

      With thanks to "Gladiator":
      http://planetjersey.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=212.msg61320#msg61320

      Delete
    2. Published British book scrutinised  The Jersey Child Abuse  inquiry by practising Australian barristers, researchers and Senior lecturers  of Socio-legal studies and in the faculty of law at the University of Sydney.

      Secrecy, Law and Society – 2 June 2015
      edited by Greg Martin, Rebecca Scott Bray, Miiko Kumar

      [14] Secret isle? Making Sense of the Jersey child abuse scandal. (pp 251 – 272 )


      https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=mesjCQAAQBAJ&pg=PT333&lpg=PT333&dq=stuart+syvret&source=bl&ots=5ZMtJq-JVp&sig=E9yNbhlTxn7f7rTMK6z-_VLkjgI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjN24fU1vLSAhUpJcAKHchXBsI4HhDoAQhAMAY#v=onepage&q=stuart%20syvret&f=false

      This book chapter about Jersey’s secrecy culture is not light reading for the judiciary, civil servants, politicians , the news media, the finance centre and church leaders of Jersey but supports the information published by the blogs of Rico Sorda, Voiceforchildren, Stuart Syvret, Leah Mcgrath Goodman.

      Ex Senator Stuart Syvret’s role as a whistleblower and victim of Jersey’s unusual data protection law interpretation, Mr Power’s suspension,  the Jersey States Members voting to keep the tape secret regarding the debate about Mr Power’s suspension, the  conflicted roles of the Bailhache brothers, Victoria College abuse, Jimmy Savile at Haut de la Garenne, the Jersey’s Nazi past and link to London city are just a few of the interesting issues the authors have researched and put into context. They have not shied away to link Jersey’s “secrecy culture”to other international institutional child sexual abuse scandals and writing about corruption and cover-ups. They even quote the Dean of Jersey, Very Rev Robert Key who warned of “ over-inquisitiveness, false sensationalism and prurient curiosity” in his prayer.

      One of their conclusions was the need of the news media to play the critical public interest role in scrutinising the police and political authority which the State’s media has clearly failed to be.

      In my humble opinion this book of law professionals underlies that there is substance to the concern of a white wash of the Jersey Child Abuse inquiry.

      REVIEW OF THIS BOOK:

      "Lawyers, scholars and most certainly journalists and feature writers doing research in any of these areas will find this book, with its extensive and meticulous footnoting, a treasure trove of references to follow up as interesting and authoritative avenues for further enquiry. What is especially refreshing about the book is its plain-speaking and quite often hard-hitting approach to the various aspects of this topic about which the individual contributors have strong views. As a contribution to the ongoing debate on the often insoluble problems inherent in issues of secrecy, security, free speech and the law, this book with its diversity of opinion is first class." - Phillip Taylor MBE, Richmond Green Chambers

      Delete
    3. Wow!
      Can you do a series of blogs on this?

      Delete
  41. Brocken hotel sold to owner of the revere hotel a few years ago so not in Brocken family ownership

    ReplyDelete
  42. Russian Opposition Leader Arrested: -

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39398305

    How does this differ to what the Jersey, Crown empowered oligarchy did to Stuart Syvret? It differs this way; the Russian opposition leader will be able to obtain legal representation. And the judges won't be chosen by directly conflicted government officials.

    Jersey: more nakedly corrupt than Putin's Russia.

    ReplyDelete

  43. Just read the section about Jersey from the publication called

    Secrecy, Law and Society

    They ain't going to like it, serious Australian authors from universities and other professions that have researched the subject that is Jersey and how it handles secrecy and institutional child abuse.

    This underlines a victory for the amateur non paid blogs who were mostly correct in their / your reporting all along.

    Get out of this one Bailhache's …… both of you. Let us see you use the Data Protection law to sue them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is that chapter on the net somewhere? I couldnt find it. I feel guilty asking for this, because the authors & publishers deserve reward for their work in writing this stuff, so there should be a load of us ordering this volume & paying fairly for it. But, really, this is so much a public interest matter, can that chapter be found somewhere the average reader can find it?

      Delete
  44. A few people appear to be having trouble but GeeGee explains how to find it.

    http://planetjersey.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=212.msg61327#msg61327

    ReplyDelete